“I like work; it fascinates me. I can sit and look at it for hours.”
Jerome K. Jerome
Only 13% of employees worldwide are engaged at work, according to Gallup’s 142-country study on the State of the Global Workplace. Most employees (63%) reported being “not engaged” (i.e., lacking in job satisfaction, organizational commitment and advocacy to promote the company to others) and 24% reported being “actively disengaged.”
OK, everyone uses the term “engagement†and some organizations have established themselves as “the†experts around the concept with well known surveys that are widely used.
So, what does this term really mean and how can it be measured?
As a “folk term†engagement has been used to describe a diverse set of measures getting at the following concepts—all have been used to define the concept and as a base to develop famous (and not so famous) surveys for research and practice:
- Psychological States (e.g., energy, involvement, commitment, satisfaction, job burnout, perceived stress, perceived justice, empowerment)
- Personality (e.g., positive affect, negative affect, conscientiousness, resilience/hardiness, optimism, core self-evaluations, proactive personality)
- Behaviors/Performance (e.g., organizational citizenship behavior, initiative, high performance, collaboration/team work, dishonesty/theft/loss)
The Envisia Learning approach has been consistent with the other well known vendors of identifying and measuring conditions under which people work (e.g., leadership practices, perceived resources/justice, social connection etc.) that impact retention, perceptions of stress and productivity ((Nowack, K. (2006). Emotional intelligence: Leaders Make a Difference. HR Trends, 17, 40-42)).
In fact, we have shown, like prior research, that talent today don’t leave organizations—they leave toxic leaders and poor leadership practices. Talent working for the interpersonally challenged reported significantly more perceived stress, greater dissatisfaction and increased intentionality to actually leave the organization. One could say these employees were “disengaged†and as my colleague and career expert Michele Rosa likes to say, “Eager to stay but ready to leave.â€
What We Are Measuring
Here is what we have been using for many years—it’s called the Leadership Effectiveness Index and it appears to have reasonable reliability (Cronbach’s alpha of .91) and predictive validity.
Leadership Effectiveness Index Questions
(1=Strongly Agree, 2=Agree, 3= Neither Agree nor Disagree, 4=Disagree, 5=Strongly Disagree
1. My manager/supervisor demonstrates competence in his or her job.
2. My manager/supervisor treats everyone fairly (i.e., plays no favorites).
3. My manager/supervisor creates a motivating and supportive work climate.
4. My manager/supervisor represents my needs, ideas and suggestions to his/her manager.
5. My manager/supervisor takes an interest in my professional growth and
development.
6. My manager/supervisor involves me in decision making, problem solving and planning processes.
7. My manager/supervisor creates a high performance and collaborative work team.
8. I have the opportunity to interact with Management above my immediate supervisor.
The “engagement†literature is becoming a bit like the stress literature—confusing definitions, eclectic measurement tools and diverse methods to assess one or more components of this construct.
Finally, is “engagement†a state that impacts other things or the outcome?
Fell free to use our “engagement†scale called the Leadership Effectiveness Index but keep in mind it is just one way to conceptualize and measure this somewhat “muddy” yet popular concept…..Be well….